LOL! How did this became relevant to the camera topic?
The topic was about something that is marketed as an premium product but essentially does the same job as something significantly cheaper?
In this instance, the camera is $x000 more than it's Sony equivalent (all be it with a rather expensive -
but not particularly sharp 
- lens) but the nuts and bolts of it are much the same.
The same logic, to me, also applies to $x,000+ sports cars, designer clothing brands and Michelin starred (or equivalent) restaurants.
The point that I was making, is that yes, the camera is way overpriced for what it
actually is, but whilst million/billionaires exist, there will always be market for such items.
In many ways, it's a particularly sensible business stragegy because 1. They can sell 1/1000 of the number of cameras (for example, not literally) to make the same amount of profit and 2. when the world markets shit themselves and we plunge into a recession, the people who will buy these products are not the people wondering whether they will be able to afford to feed their family week by week, but the people concerned that their property portfolio is now worth only $45m (for example, not literally) rather than the $210m (for example, not literally) it once was.
